Stormy Response

I suggest that you drop so-called movie critic James DiGiovanna. Anybody who pans The Hurricane as "mushy paste" (Film Clips, February 24) should never give up their day job.

This Academy contender has been praised by the Chicago Tribune, The Dallas Morning News, The Philadelphia Enquirer, The Arizona Daily Star and Time magazine.

I will give you odds that not only will Denzel Washington be nominated by the Academy as best actor but that he will also win.

I usually check the Tucson Weekly for movie reviews. But from now on I won't pay any attention to what DiGiovanna has to say.

-- A.B. Stirling

To the Editor,

Regarding James DiGiovanna's review of the movie Boys Don't Cry ("Fear and Loathing in Nebraska," March 6): He is to writing what William Shatner is to singing. He wasted two paragraphs of his column about a seemingly wonderful film with Academy Award-nominated actors trashing Nebraska. Considering he writes for a newspaper with ads that end with "well hung and uncut A+," I don't think that he is in a position to define "culture."

-- Julie Pharris

Open Season

Regarding Tom Danehy's "Close Minded" (March 2): As one of those Danehy describes so colorfully as "people who lack the testicular capacity to develop a coherent political philosophy," I decided to write this response.

If by "coherent political philosophy," you mean joining a political party, then I charge you to explain what precisely is so coherent about the Democrats (or Republicans, come to that) that should cause me to join either party.

And pray tell, which one would have me? I'm pro-choice, pro-death penalty, favor liberalizing drug laws to some extent, dislike welfare of both principal types (corporate and individual), believe in some gun control but not an outright prohibition, support free speech but think that with the right comes responsibility (as with all rights), support decriminalizing gambling and prostitution and think that subsidized health care is not only not a right but is a damned bad idea except in small doses. Tell me, which party should I join? The Republicans and Democrats are both increasingly being dominated by extreme wings that dislike the other side virulently. As a result, every four years, we get the same choice between Tweedledum and Tweedledee, with only a change of faces.

I register as an Independent only because I am forced to label myself. I prefer to think rather than box myself into one group or another. I'm disabled and so have had all sorts of labels applied to me all my life. I must admit that Danehy's label (quoted above) is one of the more colorful (as well as least accurate) ever attached to me by someone who's never met me and knows nothing on which to hang such a judgement.

If Democrats and Republicans would do a better job of picking better people to run for office instead of giving us candidates like Ronald Reagan, Walter Mondale, George Bush, Michael Dukakis, Bill Clinton, Bob Dole and now, Lord help us, yet another Bush and Al Gore, I wouldn't have an argument. It is a measure of how poor the pickings are that the most capable of the candidates now running -- the most presidential, if you will -- is Alan Keyes, who hasn't a snowball's chance in Phoenix. (Hell's not bad enough for this exercise.) I wouldn't vote for Al Gore with a gun to my head. I'd only vote for Bush if it looks like Gore might win.

Will Rogers was right when he said he belonged to no organized party; he was a Democrat. The only way to get good candidates for president is to wrest control of the nominations from the extremists in both parties and the mindless drones who don't have the testicular fortitude to do so. Absent primaries open at least to voters unaffiliated to any party, we will continue to get a succession of presidential nominees unfit to be towel boys in a Turkish prison, let alone president, as those with agendas that don't fit the majority nominate candidates who will heel, sit up and beg on command.

-- Robert Reynolds